GPL is a moralist quest to bring all software under the GPL. Some people want that, which is fine with me. But Open Source != GPL.

Some people may say that a world where (nearly) all software is GPL is better than one where (nearly) all software is MS. But I never liked this kind of menu with only two choices.

Personally I think Open Source is great for copying already known ideas and implementing them a little bit better. All the great Open Source software I know of copies something else. That's very good, because it ensures progress. But I never heard of anything really innovative that is Open Source. I think that's because innovation usually comes from a very small team (often just one person) who will spend lots and lots of time on a project, and who wants to (and has the chance to) get something back, financially. Then the Open Source community will copy it and probably improve it a bit, after a few years or so depending on how complex it is. Which is once again great.

To me, Open Source is a good tool. I like soldering irons too, but I wouldn't use a soldering iron for cutting a paper.

As for Sputnik, what I would personally like to see are a few things:
1. A release that can be included free of charge with future MorphOS versions (we can argue whether a browser is a necessity, but I think it would be very nice).
2. Continued development including the browser part. For this, I think charging for a future improved version might be better than going Open Source. It's all about getting the person who is likely to do the work motivated, and somehow I doubt a lot of people would suddenly appear out of nowhere if Sputnik just turned GPL. An alternative could be to set up another bounty at some point with some "wishlist" for improvements.
3. And of course all the licenses and agreements involved must be respected 100%, including LGPL and the bounty rules.


[ Edited by merko on 2006/8/10 18:15 ]